SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROBIOTIC LACTOBACILLUS CASEI IN FORTIFIED INDIAN MILK CAKES UNDER DIFFERENT PRESERVATION CONDITIONS-EFFECTS OF CO-IMMOBILIZATION OF L. CASEI AND COMMERCIAL PREBIOTIC INULIN (CHICORY BASED) AND MILLET INULIN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ijpps.2017v9i1.15305Keywords:
Probiotic, Lactobacillus casei (L casei), Prebiotic, Inulin, Pearl millet, Immobilization, Viability, Indian Milk cakesAbstract
Objective: The objective of the present article is to identify the most suitable Indian millet inulin for the growth of probiotic Lactobacillus casei and to evaluate the effects of the fortification vectors (probiotics and probiotic-prebiotic combination in immobilized conditions) and immobilization methods on the sustainability of L. casei in a fortified Indian sweet (milk cake) preserved under different conditions.
Methods: Inulin was extracted from pearl, finger and great millets. The concentrations of L. casei, grown on three millet inulins, were compared in 24 h batch culture. The L. casei and probiotic-prebiotic combinations namely L. casei-commercial inulin and L. casei-pearl millet inulin were immobilized using entrapment, external and internal microencapsulation methods. The Indian milk cake samples were fortified with the immobilized probiotic cells, co-immobilized probiotic-prebiotic combinations. The fortified samples were preserved at different conditions (temperature: 4 °C and-20 °C; Time: 1-4 w). The sustainability of L. casei in the preserved samples was determined using spread plate method and the cell concentrations were compared among all fortified samples.
Results: Pearl millet inulin is determined to be the most suitable millet inulin for the growth of L. casei. The synergistic combination of L. casei–pearl millet inulin, co-immobilized with internal gelation technique is the best fortification vector for the viability of L. casei in preserved food samples.
Conclusion: The L. casei, co-immobilized with pearl millet inulin through internal gelation technique, can be utilized as an effective fortification vector for the sustainability of probiotic cells in preserved Indian milk cakes and similar food samples.
Downloads
References
Iyer C, Kailaspathy K. Effect of co-encapsulation of probiotics with prebiotics on increasing the viability of encapsulated bacteria under in vitro acidic and bile salt conditions and in yogurt. J Food Sci 2005;70:M18–23.
Parwal M, Pareek R. Probiotic:-a treatment new approach. Asian J Biochem Pharm Res 2011;3:448-54.
Kawatra P, Aiyappa C. Probiotics: the undervalued conquerors. Asian J Biochem Pharm Res 2015;8:97-100.
Solanki HK, Pawar DD, Shah DA, Prajapati VD, Jani GK, Mulla AM, et al. Development of microencapsulation delivery system for long-term preservation of probiotics as biotherapeutics agent. BioMed Res Int 2013;620-719. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1155/2013/620719
Sekhon BS, Jairath S. Prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics: an overview. J Pharm Educ Res 2010;1:2.
Ziemer CJ, Gibson GR. An overview of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in the functional food concept: perspectives and future strategies. Int Dairy J 1998;8:473-9.
Gibson GR. Fibre and effects on probiotics (the prebiotic concept). Clin Nutr Suppl 2004;1:25–31.
Guarner F, Khan AG, Garisch J, Eliakim R, Gangl A, Thomson A, et al. World gastroenterology organisation practice guidelines: probiotics and prebiotics. Arab J Gastroent 2009;10:33–42.
Tripathi MK, Giri SK. Probiotic functional foods: survival of probiotics during processing and storage. J Func Foods 2014;9:225-41.
Prisco AD, Mauriello G. Probiotic action of foods: a focus on microencapsulation tool. Trends Food Sci Technol 2016;48:27-39.
Kailasapathy K. Microencapsulation of probiotic bacteria: technology and potential applications. Curr Issues Intest Microbiol 2002;3:39-48.
Krasaekoopt W, Bhandari B, Deeth H. Evaluation of encapsulation techniques of probiotics for yogurt. Int Dairy J 2003;13:3-13.
Anal AK, Singh H. Recent advances in microencapsulation of probiotics for industrial applications and targeted delivery. Trends Food Sci Technol 2007;18:240-51.
Chavarri M, Maranon I, Villaran MC. Encapsulation technology to protect probiotic bacteria. Bioprocess and Preserv Area 2012;501-29. Doi:10.5772/50046.
Banerjee D, Chowdhury R, Bhattacharya P. The prebiotic influence of inulin on growth rate and antibiotic sensitivity of Lactobacillus casei. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2016;8:181-4.
Samanta (Koruri) S, Banerjee D, Chowdhury R, Bhattacharya P. Studies on prebiotic food additive (inulin) in Indian dietary fibre sources garlic (Allium sativum), wheat(Triticum spp.),oat(Avena sativa) and dalia(Bulgur). Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6:278-82.
Chan ES, Wong SL, Lee PP, Lee JS, Ti TB, Zhang Z, et al. Effects of starch filler on the physical properties of lyophilized calcium–alginate beads and the viability of encapsulated cells. Carbohydr Polym 2011;83:225–32.
Yoo IK, Seong GH, Chang HN, Park JK. Encapsulation of Lactobacillus casei cells in liquid-core alginate capsules for lactic acid production. Enzyme Microbiol Technol 1996;19:426-33.
Song H, Yua W, Gaoa M, Liub X, Maa X. Microencapsulated probiotics using emulsification technique coupled with internal or external gelation process. Carbohydr Polym 2013;96:181–9.
Ribeiro AJ, Silva C, Ferreira D, Veiga F. Chitosan-reinforced alginate microspheres obtained through the emulsification/ internal gelation technique. Eur J Pharm Sci 2005;25:31–40.
Sultana K, Godward G, Reynolds N, Arumugaswamy R, Peiris P, Kailasapathy K. Encapsulation of probiotic bacteria with alginate–starch and evaluation of survival in simulated gastrointestinal conditions and in yoghurt. Int J Food Microbiol 2000;62:47–55.
Martin MJ, Villoslada FL, Ruiz MA, Morales ME. Effect of unmodified starch on the viability of alginate-encapsulated Lactobacillus fermentum CECT5716. LWT-Food Sci Technol 2013;53:480-6.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
